Rules of Debate

Freedom of speech is one of the most important privileges
enjoyed by Members of Parliament. This freedom is
circumscribed, however, by the necessity of maintaining
order and decorum when debate is taking place. Thus, the
right to speak is tempered by the written rules of the
House which are, in general, limitations on what may be
said, and when, by whom and for how long.

The Speaker is charged with maintaining order in the
Chamber by ensuring that the House's rules and practices
are respected including rules related to:

proper attire;

the quoting and tabling of documents in debate;

the application of the sub judice convention to
debates and questioning in the House; and

the civility of remarks directed towards both Houses,
Members and Senators, representatives of the Crown,
judges and courts.

In addition, the Speaker has the duty to maintain an
orderly conduct of debate by repressing disorder when it
arises, either on the floor of the Chamber or in the
galleries, and by ruling on points of order raised by
Members.

The Speaker's disciplinary powers ensure that the debate is
focussed and permit he or she to remove Members who persist
in behaving inappropriately. Nonetheless, while it is the
Speaker who is charged with maintaining the dignity and
decorum of the House, Members themselves must take
responsibility for their behaviour and conduct their
business in an appropriate fashion.

Recognition to Speak

There is no official order laid down in the Standing Orders
for the recognition of speakers. The written rules simply
authorize the Speaker to recognize for debate the Member
seeking the floor by rising in his or her place. The
Speaker relies on the practice and precedents of the House
when recognizing Members to speak.

Although the Whips of the various parties often provide the
Speaker with lists of Members wishing to speak, these lists
are used only as a guide. The Speaker usually recognizes
Members from opposite sides of the House in a reasonable
rotation, bearing in mind the proportions of membership of
the various recognized parties in the House and the nature
of the proceedings.

The Speaker's decision regarding who has the right to speak
during debate may be altered by the adoption of a motion
that another Member "be now heard". A decision on this
motion settles the order of debate immediately.

No Member may speak twice during debate on any motion,
though the mover of a substantive motion may speak a second
time to close the debate (the "right of reply"). A motion,
an amendment and a subamendment are three separate
questions and are treated as such for the purposes of this
rule.

Any Member who wishes to participate in the proceedings
must stand and be in his or her designated place in order
to be recognized and to speak. A Member may rise and speak
from any seat during emergency debates, during take note
debates, during the adjournment proceedings or when the
House sits as a Committee of the Whole.

Any Member participating in debate must address the
Speaker. Since one of the basic principles of procedure in
the House is that the proceedings be conducted in terms of
a free and civil discourse, Members are less apt to engage
in direct heated exchanges and personal attacks when their
comments are directed to the Chair rather than to another
Member.

While there is no Standing Order setting down a dress code
for Members participating in debate, Speakers have ruled
that to be recognized to speak, tradition and practice
require all Members, male or female, to dress in
contemporary business attire. The contemporary practice and
unwritten rule require, therefore, that male Members wear a
jacket and tie as standard dress.

Practice holds that when addressing the House, Members
should not read from a written, prepared speech. A Member
may, however, use notes when delivering a speech. The
purpose of this rule is to maintain the cut and thrust of
debate, which depends upon successive speakers addressing,
to some extent, the arguments put forward in the speeches
of other Members.

Speakers have consistently ruled out of order displays or
demonstrations of any kind used by Members to illustrate
their remarks or emphasize their positions. Similarly,
props of any kind have always been found unacceptable in
the Chamber. Members may hold notes in their hands, but
they will be interrupted and reprimanded by the Speaker if
they use papers, documents or other objects to illustrate
their remarks. Exhibits have also been ruled inadmissible.

Rules Regarding the Contents of Speeches

References to Members

During debate, Members may not refer to one another by
their names but rather by title, position or constituency
name in order to guard against all tendencies to
personalize debate. A Minister is referred to by the name
of the portfolio that he or she holds. Parliamentary
Secretaries, House Leaders and party Whips are typically
designated by the posts they hold. All other Members are
referred to by their constituency name. The Speaker will
not allow a Member to refer to another Member by name even
if the Member is quoting from a document such as a
newspaper article.

It is unacceptable to allude to the presence or absence of
a Member or Minister in the Chamber. The Speaker has
traditionally discouraged Members from signalling the
absence of another Member from the House because there are
many places that Members have to be in order to carry out
all of the obligations that go with their office, including
attendance at parliamentary committees.

A direct charge or accusation against a Member may be made
only by way of a substantive motion, for which notice is
required. Remarks directed specifically at another Member
that question that Member's integrity, honesty or
character, are not in order. A Member will be requested to
withdraw offensive remarks, allegations, or accusations of
impropriety directed towards another Member. The Speaker
has no authority, however, to rule on statements made
outside the House by one Member against another.

Reflections on the House and the Senate

Disrespectful reflections on Parliament as a whole, or on
the House and the Senate as component parts of Parliament,
are not permitted. Members of the House and the Senate are
also protected by this rule. In debate, the Senate is
generally referred to as "the other place" and Senators as
"members of the other place". References to Senate debates
and proceedings are discouraged and it is out of order to
question a Senator's integrity, honesty or character.

Reflections on the Speaker

Reflections must not be cast on the conduct of the Speaker
or other presiding officers. It is unacceptable to question
the integrity and impartiality of a presiding officer and
if such comments are made, the Speaker will interrupt the
Member and may request that the remarks be withdrawn. Only
by means of a substantive motion, for which 48 hours'
written notice has been given, may the actions of the Chair
be challenged, criticized and debated.

References to the Sovereign, Royal Family, Governor General
and Members of the Judiciary

Members are prohibited from speaking disrespectfully of the
Sovereign, the Royal Family or the Governor General. In the
same way, a reference to any one of these persons is also
prohibited when it appears to be used to influence the work
of the House.

All attacks and censures of judges and courts by Members in
debate have always been considered unparliamentary and,
consequently, treated as breaches of order. While it is
permissible to speak in general terms about the judiciary
or to criticize a law, it is inappropriate to criticize or
impute motives to a specific judge or to criticize a
decision made under the law by a judge.

Reference by Name to Members of the Public

Members are discouraged from referring by name to persons
who are not Members of Parliament and who do not enjoy
parliamentary immunity. The Speaker has ruled that Members
have a responsibility to protect the innocent, not only
from outright slander but from any slur directly or
indirectly implied, and has stressed that Members should
avoid as much as possible mentioning by name people from
outside the House who are unable to reply and defend
themselves against innuendo.

Unparliamentary Language

The use of offensive, provocative or threatening language
in the House is strictly forbidden. Personal attacks,
insults and obscene language or words are not in order.

In dealing with unparliamentary language, the Speaker takes
into account the tone, manner and intention of the Member
speaking; the person to whom the words were directed; the
degree of provocation; and, most importantly, whether or
not the remarks created disorder in the Chamber. Thus,
language deemed unparliamentary one day may not necessarily
be deemed unparliamentary on another day.

Although an expression may be found to be acceptable, the
Speaker has cautioned that any language that leads to
disorder in the House should not be used. Expressions that
are considered unparliamentary when applied to an
individual Member have not always been considered so when
applied "in a generic sense" or to a party.

Should the Speaker determine that offensive or disorderly
language has been used, the Member will be requested to
withdraw the unparliamentary word or phrase. The Member
must rise in his or her place to retract the words
unequivocally.

Repetition and Relevance in Debate

The rules respecting relevance and repetition are somewhat
difficult to define and enforce. The rule against
repetition can be invoked by the Speaker to prevent a
Member from repeating arguments already made in the debate
by other Members or the same Member. The rule of relevance,
on the other hand, is used to keep a Member from straying
from the question before the House or committee.

It is not always possible to judge the relevance (or the
repetition) of a Member's remarks until he or she has made
some progress in or completed his or her remarks. In
practice, the Speaker allows some latitude-if the rules are
applied too rigidly, they have the potential for severely
curtailing debate.

The Sub Judice Convention

During debate, in the interests of justice and fair play,
restrictions are placed on the freedom of Members of
Parliament to refer to matters actively before the courts.
Such matters are also barred from being the subject of
motions or questions in the House.

While precedents exist for the guidance of the Chair, no
attempt has ever been made in Canada to codify the practice
known as the "sub judice convention". The
interpretation of this convention is left to the Speaker
since no rule exists in the Standing Orders to prevent the
House from discussing a matter that is sub judice,
that is, "under the consideration of a judge or court".

The Speaker has routinely ruled out of order questions
concerning criminal cases once a charge has been laid until
a verdict and sentence have been reached, noting that the
Chair has the duty to balance the right of the House with
the rights and interests of the ordinary citizen undergoing
a trial. In civil proceedings the practice has been to
disallow any discussion or action once a hearing date has
been set, until the proceedings end.

Powers of the Chair to Enforce Order and Decorum

The Speaker ensures that debate conforms to the rules and
practices that the House has adopted in order to protect
itself from excesses. Indeed, the Standing Orders state
explicitly that the Speaker shall preserve order and
decorum, and decide questions of order. In addition, the
Standing Orders empower the Speaker to call a Member to
order if the Member persists in repeating an argument
already made in the course of debate or in addressing a
subject that is not relevant to the question before the
House.

Accepted conventions of parliamentary conduct and respect
for the authority of the Speaker are normally sufficient
guarantees that order and decorum are maintained during
debate and other proceedings. However, if a rule of debate
is being breached, the Speaker will intervene directly to
address a Member or the House in general and to call to
order any Member whose conduct is disruptive.

Members rarely defy the Speaker's authority or risk evoking
his or her disciplinary powers. The Speaker has recourse to
a number of options if a Member challenges the authority of
the Chair by refusing to:

obey the Speaker's call to order;

withdraw unparliamentary language;

cease irrelevance or repetition; or

stop interrupting a Member who is addressing the House.

The Speaker may recognize another Member, or refuse to
recognize the Member until the offending remarks are
retracted and the Member apologizes. As a last resort, the
Chair may "name" a Member, the most severe disciplinary
power at the Speaker's disposal.

Naming

Naming describes a disciplinary measure invoked against a
Member who persistently disregards the authority of the
Speaker. If a Member refuses to heed the Speaker's requests
to bring his or her behaviour into line with the rules and
practices of the House, the Speaker has the authority to
name the Member, that is, to address the Member by name
rather than by constituency or title as is the usual
practice, and to order his or her withdrawal from the
Chamber for the remainder of the sitting day.
Alternatively, the Speaker may prefer to let the House take
any supplementary disciplinary action it may choose. In
either case, naming is a coercive measure of last resort.